There is one great LR episode featuring Ben Stark and Huey Jensen where they talk about this, it makes in game decisions a lot different if you think it this way. And nope you should not focus on winning either you should play in a way that you are constantly increasing your chances of winning, you win by reducing your opponent life to 0 -95% of the times- but often that means you don’t straight up attack every turn.That also means that pros have 65% winrate so you should know that you are going to lose lots of games, and there is nothing you can do about it.

Now for the million dollar question on what did you end up using that Essence scatter?-Either way if you have a counter and your opponent cast Shalai, you rather miss your counter and lose that open mana in order to save it for a better target?-

Couple of turns later, used it on a Leonin Warleader.

If I had Essence Scatter mana available the turn opponent cast Shalai, I'd have used it to force the Curious Obsession creature through.

In an effort to save you thousands of dollars here is the link to the Vid:Note that this is one post produced episode and indeed has the kinda of music a cheese workshop would use -Just ignore the music and avoid puking all over your screen-

In hindsight that looks good but that could also mean using the Essence Scatter ... since I only had one copy, what if I Scatter his Shalai and then the turn after he plays an unbeatable card like Lyra?

Ben Stark says that you should not care about winning you should care about giving yourself the best chance to win in every play

So I should not care about winning; I should focus on winning?

I think this is basically saying to focus on your process and not individual results.

Basic anti-counter-measure to make him counter a weak(er) card so he can't counter the big one.

I'd probably have lost even if I countered Jadelight Ranger. A single Explore at that point was worth 9 life and 6 damage. Massive mistake on my part not to leave up two counterspells there, because there's no other way I could've lost the game.

I went with Dimir Informant both to find more lands and to be mana efficient, but I'm seriously questioning not playing Thought Erasure now to break up his curve. As it was he played Roc Charger the next turn which was mentored up, and I was at 7 life before I stabilized (actually 3 but I gained 4 with Severed Strands). Again I had the option to be mana efficient or to play Thought Erasure, and this time I went with Thought Erasure which proved to be correct because he was holding a lethal Cyclotronic Wave. Should I have played Thought Erasure on turn 3?

I find that discard effects in limited are usually at their best if used early, especially to screw up their curve and gain some tempo. Later on they tend to lose value because hands tend to get emptier.But I'm not a huge fan of discard in limited and they don't usually make the cut.

Creature I think, forces him to use a trick to barely trade up in mana and might allow a turn 4 muse drake, you get punished by maniacal rage and some uncommons iirc, and maybe by letting a skiknight legionnaire attack once?

Two mana targeted discard is decent if it has no or next to no restiction.

I know he has Fungal Infection + Ritual of Soot in his deck, as well as Disinformation Campaigns and The Eldest Reborn (at least these were in game 2 - he might've taken them out after seeing Nullhide Ferox).

My play for the turn is either Nullhide Ferox or another History of Benalia. What's the play?

I went with History to save Ferox in hand for any future "discard a card" effects, but he had the right answers to kill both Vanguard and Knight. Thought Erasure revealed I was holding Nullhide Ferox, and since I hadn't drawn my fifth mana I had to play Nullhide Ferox the turn after the sweepers. It was killed by The Eldest Reborn and I lost with opponent at 4 life when it reanimated my Carnage Tyrant (earlier discarded by Thought Erasure).

If I had played Ferox, I'd likely have won - in fact it's in the deck for this very reason, as a big threat that either trades up vs. single-target removal (= lets rest of board attack) or survives sweepers. This was a special case though because I was playing against Dimir control, and I had a reasonable other play for the turn. What's the right play?

Benalia into Benalia Vs Control is not a good play IME I would rather mix things, with 4 cmc creatures to play around Soot, I would have played Fox in your spot, I have been blown out too many times by soot at this stage of the season.

I'm with Cucho. As much as I like Benalia tokens (my #1 favorite card art), the point is, your opponent needs to kill the token(s) you already have. Now whatever does that will likely also kill any additional tokens en passant. The Foxy on the other hand demands a very specific answer and demands so much mana that your token(s) are likely to live and swing another day. Your situation sounds like he played Golden Demise (removing Adanto and tokens) into Thought Erasure on his t5. That would have left your Foxy intact. If he had opted to kill him, that would've cost at least 4 mana, leaving 1 mana to Fungal Infection Adanto and chump-block the Benalia 3 attack of one token. Worstest case scenario

Keeping Foxy in hand as discard-fodder is probably too cute in this situation given that you're not in game 1 (for he knows about it).

But.. remember that in hindsight we're all "pros" I can't say I would have come to this conclusion during the game. Maybe yes, maybe not, but my usual learning process is to make the wrong call first, realize it later and remember it every time that situation comes up in the future. So thanks for sharing this.

My thought process at the time was that obviously he'd drawn a sweeper, so I'm going to block for sure. It could've been Find//Finality in which case everything is dying anyway, while if it's Ritual of Soot he'd probably play it pre-comat. Unfortunately I didn't consider Golden Demise, blocked the two Chupcabra with my Thorn Lieutenants, and lost everything. Damn, Magic is hard.

2. GRN draft, Dimir vs. Boros. I don't remember the situation clearly anymore, but it was fairly early in the game so both of us still had cards in hand. The board is:

He plays Gird for Battle, buffs Goblin Banneret, and attacks. The Banneret mentors the Guildmage to 4/4 and is attacking as a 4/2. I'm at 18 life. Do I trade?

Spoiler

I'm less sure about this one. In the event I figured that I should, because otherwise the Guildmage will activate to keep the Thoughtbound Phantasm from blocking. Taking an extra 8 damage is also substantial. On the other hand if I take 8 this turn, next turn the Phantasm will be 5/5 and can block the Guildmage. Opponent would have to sink mana to activate the Guildmage, and he's already mana constrained. On yet another hand, if opponent had a combat trick next turn I'd just take an extra 4 damage for nothing. What's the play?

Seeking opinions on this because it's something I might be doing wrong. I don't have the exact situation anymore, but the board looked something like this:

Opponent (Esper control): about 8 lands, Chemister's Insight in the graveyard, nothing else in play, 5 cards in hand. Opponent is at 13 life.Me (Temur reclamation): about 7 lands, Rekindling Phoenix in play, Wilderness Reclamation in play, 6 cards in hand including two Niv-Mizzet, two Sinister Sabotage, and another Wilderness Reclamation, but no lands.

It's post-board. Do I play Niv-Mizzet?

Spoiler

I went ahead and did it. I figured I would be okay, because I have Reclamation in play, and because I had another Niv-Mizzet anyway. Opponent responded with Mortify on the Reclamation. Next turn, he played Kaya's Wrath to kill Niv-Mizzet. I played the other Niv-Mizzet, he played another Kaya's Wrath and Vraska's Contempt on the Phoenix. The game slipped out of control later as I drew land after land with no action cards.

I'm wondering if I should've sat behind the two Sinister Sabotages and the Phoenix, waiting to draw lands so I always have counters up. It feels like I should have, after all he's taking 4 damage a turn. On the other hand I also have two of the strongest threats in my deck in hand. Opponent already has to answer Phoenix, and now I'm presenting him with another threat that he must answer + he cannot counter.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum